[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220225172644.76fyxjximjrcdbzt@treble>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2022 09:26:44 -0800
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, joao@...rdrivepizza.com, hjl.tools@...il.com,
andrew.cooper3@...rix.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
ndesaulniers@...gle.com, keescook@...omium.org,
samitolvanen@...gle.com, mark.rutland@....com,
alyssa.milburn@...el.com, mbenes@...e.cz, rostedt@...dmis.org,
mhiramat@...nel.org, alexei.starovoitov@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/39] x86: Kernel IBT
On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 04:43:20PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 04:28:32PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > +void *skip_endbr(void *addr)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long size, offset;
> > +
> > + if (is_endbr(*(unsigned int *)addr) &&
> > + kallsyms_lookup_size_offset((unsigned long)addr, &size, &offset) &&
> > + !offset)
> > + addr += 4;
> > +
> > + return addr;
> > +}
>
> Damn, I just realized this makes KERNEL_IBT hard depend on KALLSYMS :-(
Why should the jump label patching code even care whether there's an
ENDBR at the jump target? It should never jump to the beginning of a
function anyway, right? And objtool presumably doesn't patch out ENDBRs
in the middle of a function.
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists